Electronic messaging systems that allow individuals to communicate with one another over a network using stationary or mobile electronic devices are ubiquitous. Arguably, the most commonly used electronic messaging technique is a messaging technique known as electronic mail or email. Most, if not all, electronic devices include an email client that allows the device to receive and send email messages to other email clients on other electronic devices. Generally, an email message sent from one device is received by an email server in the network and stored in a “mailbox” for the receiving party. The receiving party must retrieve the email message from the mailbox.
Another type of electronic messaging technique that has recently gained wide spread use is commonly known as instant messaging (IM). An IM client in the electronic device allows the device to send and receive electronic messages near instantaneously via an IM service provider in the network. The IM service provider routes messages directly from the sender to the recipient, so long as the recipient is able to receive the message, i.e., the recipient is online. Such IM service providers include AOL, MSN, Yahoo, and other similar service providers. Hence, with IM, users can exchange messages in close to real-time, and such communications more closely resemble a typical conversation.
Typically, the IM client organizes and displays each message in the chronological order in which it was received or sent. For example, if a first user is chatting with a second user, a message sent by the first user is displayed in a message window and when the second user replies, the response is displayed beneath the message sent by the first user. The first user's reply to the second user's response, when sent, is displayed beneath the second user's response. Hence, the presumption is that each successive message is in response to the preceding message. Chronological organization is not a problem so long as each user is willing to wait politely for the other user to compose and send his or her response before doing the same.
That, however, is not usually the case. More typically, during a chat session, the communication between users is a rapid-fire exchange of short messages, e.g., much like a conversation. Users typically do not wait politely for a reply to their messages before sending another message. The next message might be an extension of thoughts in the previous message or completely unrelated. Hence, while one user is composing a reply to a first message, several additional messages can be received and displayed in the message window. When the user sends the reply, the reply is displayed beneath the last message received, which is not necessarily the message to which the reply is related. Thus, when the user reviews the messages displayed in the message window, confusion can arise as to which message the reply is related.
For example, consider FIG. 1A, which is an exemplary user interface provided by an IM client in an electronic device. The conversation window 100a indicates that Dave is chatting with Richard. The message window 110 displays previously transmitted and received messages 112 that reflect an ongoing communication between Dave and Richard in which Dave has sent a message (M1) to Richard asking Richard how to program a VCR. Richard's response (M2) provides step by step instructions. Dave tries to follow Richard's instructions but is unable to program the VCR. Dave composes an outgoing message (M3) in the composition window 120 telling Richard of his failure. In the meanwhile, Richard has discovered that he has given Dave the wrong instructions and sends a follow up message (M4) that includes the correct instructions. Dave does not read Richard's follow up message (M4) and sends the outgoing message (M3) back to Richard.
FIG. 1B is an exemplary user interface 100b provided by an IM client on Richard's device. Dave's reply (M3) is received and the message window 110 displays the reply (M3) beneath the Richard's follow up message (M4). Because Dave's reply (M3) does not indicate that it is related to Richard's erroneous instructions (M2), Richard assumes that the reply (M3) is related to the follow up message (M4) including the correct instructions. Richard then composes an acerbic reply (M5) because he thinks Dave is incompetent, logs off, and prepares to pay a visit to Dave.
Clearly, as illustrated in the example above, chronological organization of the displayed messages 112 can cause confusion during an exchange, which can be a serious problem for customer relations management (CRM). In that environment, a CRM team must be able to determine which messages are relevant to a customer's response. If the CRM team's reply is off the mark, the customer will be frustrated with the CRM team's lack of responsiveness and can terminate the relationship. In addition, chronological organization of the displayed messages 112 can cause confusion if the messages are reviewed at a later time, e.g., by an administrator or investigator who was not a party to the original communication.